#the education system for making me feel better than others when i wasnt rlly. its probably both equally. its my fault for believing and | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

transmutationisms · 10 months

Note

sorry could you explain your chatgpt essay thing again? i get the general gist of it (who cares if they cheat) but i still cant grasp it entirely as someone who hasnt experienced the college system 💔 i had thought that essays were a foundational part of undergrad education? and so cheating on that part would essentially mean that: a) their education/understanding is "invalid" b) it discredits the work of other people in the same system/their classmates c) their future publications/written work in academia are going to be of worse quality d) in cases of people going to non academia jobs, like being a doctor or a lawyer, this would negatively impact their clients e) they have bad work ethic = will not survive job industry

my guesses are that just in general theres no direct correlation between these things but ppl assume there will be? and that if a plagiarized essay ruins everything then the system wasnt rlly that good?

the only one im rlly unsure of is the second one, but i suppose thats always been a problem with any type of academic cheating amongst peers, and will persist unless academic rankings/validation of excellence/general attitudes toward "success" r also banished. still, while i rlly dont care abt anyone i know cheating on stuff like this lol, i cant help but empathize w students struggling under that same system feeling frustrated. tho Man seeing the lack of empathy they, in turn, can have with chatgpt users. idk, is it just a lose lose situation until you get through the system?

ok sorry again and also thanks

hi, no worries. let me try to break down my position here.

i had thought that essays were a foundational part of undergrad education

i mean, this varies widely by course / degree / department. but, even when it's true, it doesn't mean that the essay is inherently a valuable or helpful exercise. undergrad essays tend to ask for one of a few very formulaic responses and ways of structuring an argument. essays also often have a specific prompt, which can be better or worse in terms of its potential to generate engagement with the course / material. often professors who are getting a lot of chatgpt essays turned in are designing essays poorly (ie, asking for the types of formulaic responses that students find unengaging and unhelpful for their own academic development), and / or failing to provide instruction and support in how to actually write an essay.

on a more fundamental level, we often take for granted that essays are and should be foundational to an undergrad education, but i simply don't think this is self-evident or always true! what are we training students to do, and why? there are certainly jobs, career paths, and academic research areas in which essay-writing is an important skill. there are others in which it's not. the assumption that all undergrads need to demonstrate the same sorts of writing skills says more about the university and what pedagogues value than it does about those students' actual chances for future career success / financial stability. if we're designing assignments that, for many students, are mere hoops to jump through, then we shouldn't be surprised that many of them find ways to make the hoop-jumping faster and easier.

so cheating on that part would essentially mean that: a) their education/understanding is "invalid"

again, what i'm trying to get at here is larger questions about what we value in education, and why. it's true that if you don't practice writing the type of essay the academy demands of you, you won't learn that skill. but, why do we assume that skill is useful, valuable, or necessary in the first place? how many people actually need to write that way outside of undergrad classrooms? even for those who are intending to pursue a career in academia, the writing taught in undergrad should be, at best, a stepping-stone on the path to more effective and interesting means of written communication. once again, if the skill being mandated by the university is not useful for students, it should not be surprising that many of them resent having to demonstrate it, and turn to tools like chatgpt instead.

b) it discredits the work of other people in the same system/their classmates

this is an argument that many educators make, and i wholeheartedly disagree with it! first of all, i simply do not believe that student a's academic performance is relevant to the assessment of student b's. if a professor is grading that way, that's terrible grading and a terrible pedagogical philosophy. if a student has learned something from their coursework, that shouldn't be undercut or devalued by anything that their classmates have or haven't done.

what this type of argument points to on a deeper level is the fact that university degrees have acquired a sort of double meaning. although the university likes to propagate high-minded rhetoric about the intrinsic value of education, the degree granted is a class barrier that serves to allow certain people access to certain (usually promised to be higher-paying) jobs, and bar others from these jobs. this is a large part of what i'm talking about when i say that the university serves to perpetuate and enforce class stratification. and their narrative about degrees being markers of individual merit and achievement is undercut by the fact that they also plainly fear losing prestige status by granting degrees to those students considered 'unworthy'. if you can make it through an undergrad education without learning the skills the university purports to teach, that's a pretty massive indictment of the university—which, remember, is collecting a lot of tuition money for these degrees.

c) their future publications/written work in academia are going to be of worse quality

lots of assumptions baked in here—that undergrad essay-writing teaches 'good' (effective / clear) writing; that many academics don't already write poorly by these metrics; that aspiring academics have no other way of learning written communication skills (eg, outside of the academy, or in grad school).

d) in cases of people going to non academia jobs, like being a doctor or a lawyer, this would negatively impact their clients

firstly, i would again point out that in many non-academic jobs, academic writing is simply not a necessary skill; secondly, in both of the examples you cite here, these are people who need to go through a lot more schooling and training after undergrad, where they pick up what written communication skills they actually do need (eg, legal writing looks nothing like standard undergrad essay-writing anyway); thirdly, MANY people getting an undergraduate degree are intending to pursue jobs for which they need neither undergrad essay-writing skills, nor further higher education—there are so many reasons a person might want / need a college degree, and so many careers in which this specific academic skillset is simply not relevant for them.

e) they have bad work ethic = will not survive job industry

again, i think this is making some pretty big unstated assumptions! in general i don't really think that 'work ethic' (or the related 'laziness') is a useful way to try to evaluate people's behaviour, and this is a good example of one way in which it fails. if, like i said, we are dealing with a system in which people are told they need to receive a degree in order to have access to jobs they want and financial stability they need; and in which many of them are being forced to demonstrate a specific writing skill they may never need again and may have no interest in; and in which they are often not even receiving adequate training and help to learn and demonstrate that skill, even if they do want to; and in which they may be working other jobs, caring for family members, dealing with disabilities the institution does not provide support for, or any number of other life circumstances that make schoolwork difficult at best to complete; and in which a tool exists that may be able to help them complete some of this work freely and quickly... like, i simply do not fault students for using that tool!

there are so many points of failure in this system long before we get to this moment: the increasing pressure to get a college degree in the first place; the poorly designed curricula that prioritise skills considered 'standard' (for whom? why?) over skills that students actually need or want to acquire; professors who don't actually teach students how to write, yet expect them to turn in essay assignments anyway; specific essay assignments that are uninteresting and / or unhelpful to students; lack of support for students who are struggling with their workload or assignments in any number of ways (and no, 'come to office hours' is not adequate support for so many students and situations).

i simply do not care about people 'cheating' a system that is so fundamentally broken and unjust. it doesn't matter. the ability to write an undergrad essay is such an incredibly trivial and specific skill, and one that most people simply do not need. it doesn't make a person generally 'smarter' (fake concept) and certainly does not make them any more competent at the vast majority of jobs, careers, or general life skills. even for those very few who do need to know this specific thing, i reject the assumption that the university is the only way to learn it, or even a particularly effective way. once again, if chatgpt is successfully completing assignments, maybe those assignments weren't very good in the first place! and even the theoretical amazing professor is simply not able to counter all of the structural issues and inequities in the university system that produce students' desire to turn to tools like chatgpt in the first place. the textbot itself is simply not the issue here.

#academia #long post

67 notes · View notes

anonymoustalks · 4 years

Text

idk if lenins polcy of bruning churches was good but you have to have soem kind of athiest government

(6-20-20) You both like politics.

You: hi

Stranger: hi

Stranger: ideology?

You: moderate left

You: you?

Stranger: far left

Stranger: uk

You: ahh kay

You: why do you like omegle?

Stranger: er dunno just fun to chat without consequences i guess

You: mhm that's fair

You: I like to hear about what other ppl think

Stranger: yh and argueing

You: haha I don't really argue that much

Stranger: some people arnt worth ur time

You: mhm maybe

You: where are you from?

Stranger: uk^^

You: I'm from the us

Stranger: noice

You: and I'm totally ignorant of british politics lol

Stranger: i know a little bit about america

You: how does your government work?

Stranger: cos its the centre of the world

You: sorry if this is a really dull question

Stranger: its fine ill asnwer w my limited understanding

You: I just ran into someone who was praising the monarchy

Stranger: pfft

Stranger: haha

Stranger: so basically above everyone we have a queen who approves certain stuff and has the ability to interjec tin products but msotly doesn then you have the unlected house of lords which is aristocrats recommended by other rich ppl and below that the ppl elected

Stranger: we have a prime minister so he doesnt have the same powers as president

Stranger: but hes more powerful than other pm's

You: mhm

You: the house of lords...

Stranger: yep

You: is the aristocracy still a big thing in the uk?

Stranger: its just like the senate in the usa except not elected and idk probaably

You: how does someone get recommended to the house of lords?

Stranger: be rich adn good at something or know someone whos rich

You: ahh I think it's weird that it's so closely tied to wealth

Stranger: not really the uk ruling class make it prtty obvious to us peasnts that its a ruling class fake democracy

Stranger: unlike the usa where everybody is supposed classless

You: right

You: I guess that's a fair statement

Stranger: but yeah fuck the queen

Stranger: how was the guy defedning monarchy?

You: oh he sounded kind of weird

You: like how god and the monarchy is essential for uk's stability and being

Stranger: pfft

You: he didn't really explain much

Stranger: both are irelevant nowadays

You: just pointed out that france and us are chaotic, according to him because there is no monarchy

Stranger: oh yeah thats totally

Stranger: why

You: yeah lol

Stranger: if only they had a monarchy then there owuld be no class and racial conflict

You: so how far left are you?

Stranger: very far

You: anarchist?

Stranger: nope left communist

Stranger: basically anti stalinist communist

You: what does your ideal government look like?

Stranger: well until you have a relatively stateless socialism you have a dictatorship of the proleterait

Stranger: and that has an armed population as the army and has direct democracy and a representive democracy who are payed wages simualr to that of a workmans

Stranger: in brief

You: mhm and membership has a criteria that you must be working class?

Stranger: membership of the democratic process yep

Stranger: a worker

You: mhm

Stranger: not necearily poor

You: what is the exact definition of working class btw?

Stranger: sombody who doesnt own and live off capitlist property

Stranger: or is a cpatilsit in other respects

Stranger: like an investor

Stranger: businessmen landlords and bankers

You: hmm I feel like it's hard for me to draw parallels

You: I know a pharmacist friend

You: who rents his place

You: for extra cash

Stranger: well when we have the revolution i doubt he'll be locked up or anything but youknow

Stranger: hes just a small landlord i guess

Stranger: supplemetning work income

You: so would people just discouraged from doing that kind of stuff?

Stranger: well hosuing will be nationalised as an early step

Stranger: so you wont have to

You: mhm

Stranger: making rent equal to bills

You: my parents also have investments

You: for like retirement

You: and just in general

Stranger: sure

You: was curious what would happen to those

Stranger: well i mean by investor sombody who is rich and does it for a job

You: ah kay

Stranger: the socialsit pension ting will be good anyhow

You: mhm

You: do you think that's it necessary for the world to follow this model? Or do you think that it can still work with just a communist state on it's own?

Stranger: nah for a lot of reasons you cant have it in one or a few states surrounded by cpaitlsit ones

Stranger: for one a DOTP surrounded by cpatilist states is forced to act like one to compete

Stranger: and therefore exploit other countries and its own labourers to the max

You: right, I was curious about that actually

Stranger: that was trotsky's argument

You: mhm

Stranger: he said u cant have 'socialsism in one country' because you have to first have international DOTP

You: dotp stands for?

Stranger: or you just become a state cpaitlist state like stalin

You: dictatorship of the prol.?

Stranger: dictatorship of the proletariat

Stranger: yep

You: mhm, that makes a lot of sense

Stranger: yep

Stranger: DOTP being when workers hold the state but not the economy

Stranger: the economy is still in private hands

You: right

You: I think I mix up all the varieties of socialism and communism

Stranger: yh DOTP isnt so much a variety but a transition

Stranger: from cpaitlism to socialism/com

You: mhm

You: I feel like I think about human nature cynically

Stranger: oh go on

You: as in, I'm skeptical of being satisfied with equality

You: *ppl being

Stranger: well tehy certainly arnt satified by inequality so how bad can it really get?

You: mhm true

Stranger: we dont mean absolute equality

Stranger: just equality of opporutunity to realise ur best self

You: idk if this is school bias or anything, but when we learn about communism, it's often framed that the party just ends up with all the wealth

You: or power

Stranger: theres a reason that idea of so called communism is taught rlly

Stranger: mainly cos of porpaganda but theres some truth

Stranger: under lenin the state was definitely a semi deictatorship of a few workers parties

Stranger: but with a democratic mechanism and worker councils to elect them

You: hm

You: *mhm

Stranger: with the intention of educating a largely illitarate peasant russia into a democratic socialsit society

Stranger: but after the vicotry of stalin after lenins death, whatever redistribution of power was dropped and centrlasing power in the party and in stalin was the priority

You: right

Stranger: so there is a history to it

You: I feel like I was thought that there was a component of ideological purity -- like, if you expressed greater loyalty to the party, you could get more stuff

You: like better food tickets or cars or stuff

You: *taught

Stranger: sure teh soviet union during and after stalin was definitely a class society

You: mhm, how do you avoid class from rearising?

Stranger: you dont centralise power in bureacracy

Stranger: and make it mroe acoutnable

Stranger: you arm the popualtion

Stranger: make durable directly democratic mechanisms

Stranger: accountability at all level

You: so you're saying like enshrining freedom of speech / freedom of arms in the system?

Stranger: im not a freedom of speech absolutist but sure

Stranger: its very important

You: wasn't China kinda of freedom of speech until tianmensquare, were they?

Stranger: ha no

Stranger: you got tortured if you spoke out

You: ah kay

Stranger: same as soviet union really

Stranger: mao wasnt masively different

You: I'm just thinking of the blm protests in the US

Stranger: yh

You: when ppl feel like change isn't happening

You: then they can get violent

Stranger: yep

You: was just curious how your government would handle that

Stranger: well the governmetn and the people are intrinsically merged

Stranger: but it depends like waht the situation would be

You: mhm I mean technically there's universal suffrage in the US but not everyone votes

Stranger: yep

Stranger: electoral college too

You: and I think minority parties can sometimes be the loudest and most opinionated

Stranger: yh

You: so even with a proletariat government I think there might still be disagreement

Stranger: yh

Stranger: for sure

Stranger: and debate

Stranger: whats ur point

You: mhm idk

Stranger: aight sitl idk the answers

You: yeah it's interesting

Stranger: what are u taught abotu socialism in schools

You: mhm, I guess just the things I said?

You: I think we studied east germany and the ussr

Stranger: ah k

Stranger: yep

You: what life was like

You: to live there

Stranger: sure and if you trying and feed everyone this is waht happens type shite

Stranger: you cant be nice with the economy

You: mhm I don't think my teachers tried to make extremely biased conclusions or anything

You: but the curriculum itself could be biased I think

Stranger: k yeah same

Stranger: yeah fr

Stranger: we dont learn at all about the british empire

You: yup

Stranger: like not once

Stranger: or really any british history beyond knights and castles

You: actually in world history class my teacher commented that I was beginning to sound "anti-american" lol

Stranger: haha good

Stranger: anti american what a word

Stranger: being anti imperialist and anti racist is being anti british too

You: lol

Stranger: tells u what they think about britishness

Stranger: its not culture but power

Stranger: which is a load of bs

You: mhm

Stranger: what did you say to teacher

You: idk I'm not very nationalist

You: I didn't say anything, I'm not really the kind of person to argue

Stranger: neither but i like uk just not enough to block refugees to preserve it

Stranger: like some wacko patriots are

You: mhm

Stranger: they act like the uks not been 15% non white since like 1940

You: mhm

You: what do you think of their opinion that a country should have a right to control their own culture/ethnicities?

Stranger: erm

Stranger: well thats tough

Stranger: i think the ideal of direct dmeocracy and a reactioanry population is contradictory

Stranger: and therefore maybe u need more centralised leadership there

You: I think I heard a scenario of belgium or something wanting to block the construction of mosques in like a historical district or something

You: to preserve their national culture/history

Stranger: yep idk

You: yeah idk either

Stranger: but like how would direct democrayc work in somalia

Stranger: or saudi arabia

Stranger: thats a tough question

Stranger: would men use it to repress women

You: mhm yup

You: or well, there are several states that have a democracy

Stranger: its like india was basically a dicatroship for its first 20 years

You: and they voted to impose state religion

You: state religious laws

You: that kind of thing

Stranger: basically cos it would be a bloodbath

Stranger: of relgion and caste

Stranger: so the governmetn had to go against the people to do whats the long term good

You: I think it's sometimes hard to have foresight about what the "long term good" is though

You: like everybody things they are doing things for long term good

You: *thinks

Stranger: well in indias caste removing caste racism and relgious bigotry was a big thing

Stranger: and many people died due to it

You: mhm

You: I think it's really hard for me to know what is "right"

Stranger: and i think general equality is a good thing impose against a population

Stranger: if they dont want it

Stranger: thats the only way change has ever come

You: mhm although I think indoctrination is always possible

Stranger: eh

You: I mean, this is kind of a hot take, but Western values are indoctrinated

Stranger: yeahthey are

You: similarly speaking you could indoctrinate capitalistic values or communist values

Stranger: some are right some are wrong

Stranger: not succesfully

You: and I think the ppl who grow up with whatever they are indoctrinated with are generally happy

You: and support the views they grow up with

Stranger: yeah true

You: although I think it's sad for whoever gets left out of the system

Stranger: like anti deisicimination laws are passed despite a population

Stranger: for a long term good

You: mhm

You: yeah idk governments are hard haha

Stranger: haha yes

Stranger: thats why were still talking about it

You: mhm

You: I don't really know what to think about ppl who support religious states

You: like indonesia has that problem

Stranger: theyre idiots

You: like they want their state to become religious

Stranger: ik snd prolly will

You: but if I imagine myself in their shoes

You: I think they just want to be closer to their religion

You: which is like a personal value

You: like I'm secular, so things like freedom and equality mean a lot to me

Stranger: truw

You: but I can also imagine a different world were idk god and faith matter a lot to me

You: we have pretty significant freedom of religion battles in the us

Stranger: same]

Stranger: if i didnt grow up in suhc an athiest school and get bullied for it id be hardcore jesus

You: oh your family is religious?

Stranger: yep

You: mhm I was reading about the us lgbt anti-discrimination ruling earlier

Stranger: yeah

You: the religious schools here are worried about being affected

You: like they don't want to hire gay teachers

Stranger: good

You: bc they're a religious school

Stranger: get w the program schools

Stranger: idk if lenins polcy of bruning churches was good but you have to have soem kind of athiest government

You: mhm I think anti-discrimination is good, but I feel like I can understand their resistance of feeling like they can't teach their religion the way they want

Stranger: sure yeah

You: idk most things I don't know what to think lol

Stranger: but think about if they dont get agy teachers

Stranger: anti discimination laws dont work

You: hm?

Stranger: cos u can jsut say u didnt disciminate and taht it

You: ohh no it still matters

You: like imagine you are a religious school

You: and a pastor applies and says they are a gay priest

You: and you don't want to hire them

You: they can sue bc discrimination

Stranger: maybe but its a relgious school why u even applying

You: mhm some ppl kind of want to change christianity I think

You: like there are pastors who are much more sympathetic to lgbt

Stranger: eh still

Stranger: lictus and that

Stranger: levictus

You: yeah idk

You: most of the churches in my area are pro-lgbt

Stranger: pretty sure my preist is closeted

You: aww

Stranger: hes very camp

You: camp ?

Stranger: and went to cambridge

Stranger: femenine

You: ahh

Stranger: yep

You: yeah religion is an odd place in politics for me

You: like it's often at the root of weird stuff

Stranger: oh yeah

Stranger: are u relgious

You: that runs counter to like modern science common sense

You: no

You: well, I'm like 20% spiritual I guess

You: but I'm not religious

Stranger: yep

Stranger: never got the difference

You: between spiritual and religious?

Stranger: yep

You: oh, for me, religious is like adhering to a religion, or denomination, or religious practice

You: spiritual is like vaguely believe in something

You: *belieiving

You: without doing anything about it

You have disconnected.

#omegle #politics #communism #uk #dictatorship of the proletariat #class warfare #education #indoctrination #religion #reigious freedom

0 notes